RFP 9531BM25Q0014_Incident Management Software.pdf

*Please disregard the address listed under Period of Performance Address below. This address is generated by the contract-writing system in error.

Section B – Prices, Page 1 of 5

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

1. SUPPLIES OR SERVICES

The contractor shall provide a cloud-based, web-enabled software as a service solution to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The period of performance of this requirement is for one (1) base year and up to four (4) option years.

2. MINIMUM/MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SUPPLIES OR SERVICES

(a) The minimum amount of supplies and services that will be ordered during the effective period of this contract is $30,000. The maximum amount of supplies and services that may be ordered during the effective period of this contract is $500,000.

(b) The minimum amount is reached when the quantity all ordered supplies or services equals or exceeds the minimum amount stated in paragraph (a).

(c) The maximum amount is reached when the quantity of all ordered supplies and services equals the maximum amount stated in paragraph (a).

3. PRICES OF SERVICES UNDER INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE

QUANTITY (IDIQ) CONTRACT

The government contemplates award of (one) 1 Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contract with individually funded task orders using firm-fixed price (FFP) rates resulting from this solicitation. The contractor shall furnish all necessary labor, supplies, and technology to provide the supplies and/or services as set forth in Section C, Statement of Work (SOW).

No future work is ordered by this IDIQ contract beyond the minimum amount of services provided in Section “B.2 Minimum/Maximum Amount of Supplies or Services” until funds are obligated through the issuance of individually funded firm fixed-price task orders.

The contractor shall provide all discovery support, software, labor, and materials to implement its software solution to be fully functional and to meet the requirements of the SOW, including testing and demonstration, and provide training.

Contractors shall complete the pricing tables below for evaluation purposes as well as for ordering purposes over the course of the resulting contract. Where quantities are not listed, the contractor shall propose the hours required. The quantities listed in the charts below may not be representative of the quantities ultimately included in the contract but may be included strictly for the purpose of price evaluation.

Section B – Prices, Page 2 of 5

A. BASE YEAR EVALUATED PRICES

EVALUATED BASE YEAR PRICE – INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AS A SERVICES

AS SET FORTH IN SOW

Supply/Service Category Quantity Unit of Issue FFP Rate Total Price

Software 250 Each $____________

Discovery Services Hours $____________

Implementation Services Hours $____________

Professional Services (Training, change management, module customization, etc.)

15 Hours $____________ $____________

Active Directory Integration 1 Year $____________ $____________

SMS Messages Per Year (Volume Based Mass Notification) 60,000 Each $____________

Total Base Year Price $_____________

B. OPTION YEAR 1 EVALUATED PRICES

EVALUATED OPTION YEAR 1 PRICE – INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AS A

SERVICES

AS SET FORTH IN SOW

Supply/Service Category Quantity Unit of

Active Directory Integration 1 Year $____________

Section B – Prices, Page 3 of 5 customization, etc.)

15 Hours $____________ $____________

Based Mass Notification) 60,000 Each $____________ $____________

Total Option Year 1 Price $_____________

C. OPTION YEAR 2 EVALUATED PRICES

EVALUATED OPTION YEAR 2 PRICE – INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AS A

AS SET FORTH IN SOW

Supply/Service Category Quantity Unit of

Active Directory Integration 1 Year change management, module customization, etc.)

15 Hours $____________

Based Mass Notification) 60,000 Each $____________ $_____________

Total Option Year 2 Price $_____________

D. OPTION YEAR 3 EVALUATED PRICES

EVALUATED OPTION YEAR 3 PRICE – INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AS A

AS SET FORTH IN SOW

Supply/Service Category Quantity Unit of

Section B – Prices, Page 4 of 5

Total Option Year 3 Price $_____________

E. OPTION YEAR 4 EVALUATED PRICES

EVALUATED OPTION YEAR 4 PRICE – INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AS A

AS SET FORTH IN SOW

Supply/Service Category Quantity Unit of change management, module

Total Option Year 4 Price $_____________

Section B – Prices, Page 5 of 5

F. TOTAL EVALUATED CONTRACT PRICE

TOTAL EVALUATED CONTRACT PRICE

INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AS A SERVICES AS SET FORTH IN SOW

Description Total Price

Total Evaluated Base Year Price

Total Evaluated Option Year 1 Price

Total Evaluated Option Year 2 Price

Total Evaluated Option Year 3 Price

Total Evaluated Option Year 4 Price

Evaluated Total Contract Price (Base Year + Option Years 1-4)

[END OF SECTION]

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 1 of 8

SECTION C – STATEMENT OF WORK

Incident Management System

1. BACKGROUND

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is a federal agency mandated by Congress to investigate all aviation accidents and selected accidents/incidents in other modes of transportation and report the results of those investigations. In support of this mission, the NTSB runs a 24-hour 7 day a week Response Operations Center (ROC). The NTSB’s ROC is seeking a cloud-based, web-enabled software capable of providing a centralized, secure, and integrated incident management system designed to manage incidents, accidents, and events.

The agency requires an efficient means of disseminating information with and among investigative participants.

The NTSB currently operates a centralized information dashboard for gathering real time investigative data. The NTSB has a continued need to further utilize a solution that will disseminate accurate and timely information to the intended audience as soon as the information is generated with auditing capabilities, real-time notification via short messaging services (SMS) texting, email and other forms of messaging for both the ROC mission.

NTSB staff regularly deploy to accident sites to conduct our accident investigations. Accidents can occur in a variety of locations across the country and world, and the hazards are often not known until we arrive on scene.

Assessing those hazards, the risks associated, and potential mitigation strategies and PPE requirements are all critical to ensuring the safety of our employees. As part of a process of continuous improvement, this risk assessment has been reviewed and revised to accurately reflect potential hazards while making it simple for investigators to complete while on scene.

2. SCOPE OF WORK

The NTSB’s ROC is seeking a cloud-based web-enabled software as a service (SaaS) solution capable of providing a centralized, secure, and integrated incident management system designed to manage information during the launch of incidents, accidents, and events. The software shall include the ability to process information for mission/tasking, situation reporting, significant events, and incident action planning. The NTSB ROC staff shall be able to use the software to track, view, and print reports with the above information. The contractor shall provide professional services which are specialized in nature and focused on configuration and technical support for the software technology. The software shall provide an emergency notification system to send SMS text, email messages, and voicemail messages to an individual or Outlook Active Directory group simultaneously through multiple types of devices (Android or Apple devices, email, and voicemail). The software shall be able to function for a minimum of 250 users simultaneously.

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 2 of 8

The implementation, installation and configuration of the software shall provide:

2.1.1 Ability to process information for mission/tasking, situation reporting, significant events, and incident action planning create and send SMS text, email messages, and voicemail messages to an individual, groups, and external entities.

2.1.2 Ability for recipient to respond back to messages with options to join telecoms.

2.1.3 Ability to get overall notification results and create reports.

2.1.4 Ability to provide status board access/ dashboard with limited read/write only functions to select users.

2.1.5 Ability to allow simultaneous data entry, deletion, and closeouts with the ability to identify who made the entry, deletion and/or closeout, time stamp the action and create a timeline of all actions.

2.1.6 Ability for a select group of users to update all users’ contact data.

2.1.7 Ability for select group of users to create and store prerecorded messages (i.e., accident/incident background information).

2.1.8 Ability to allow limited (read only) to others depending on the nature of the event.

2.1.9 Ability to allow employees to self-register their individual profiles and update contact information.

2.1.10 Ability to access system via any web-based connection (browser or internet connected device) with appropriate user authentication and security controls. The software shall have the capability to independently continue services in the event NTSB’s IT infrastructure is compromised.

2.1.11 Ability to allow the NTSB to provide portal access to outside originations who are not operating the same software/solution.

2.1.12 Ability to map locations and addresses in the system.

2.1.13 Chatroom instant messaging capability Between internal and external entities,

2.1.14 Ability to create and update forms and templates

2.1.15 Ability to create and print after-action reports.

2.1.16 Ability to archive full operational status.

2.1.17 Ability to be compatible with web-based emergency notification system using SMS, landline, cell phones and emails to contact individuals 24-hours 7-days per week.

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 3 of 8

2.1.18 Ability to create an internal flag/warning system that is user specific before data is shared or emailed.

2.1.19 Ability to modify time zones for sending /receiving messages.

2.1.20 Ability to send info with a button click from the Journal to the Daily Shift log.

2.1.21 Ability to send caller info from the intake form to a duty officer as an email.

2.1.22 Critical technical support available 365, 24 /7.

2.1.23 Ability to allow NTSB personnel to create and customize modules with ease within the incident management software for data collection and reporting needs for various offices with differing missions and/or contractor development of new modules. For example:

a. Message templates

b. Custom message distribution lists

2.2 Enterprise Risk Management Worksheet

Contractor shall discover, analyze, and recommend an end to end “to be” NTSBs business process for managing the on-scene hazard identification and risk mitigation.

Contractor shall Configure the platform and implement the “to be” business process for the staff to manage all on-scene hazard identification and risk mitigation.

Contractor shall configure and design the executable templates derived from risk assessments (RA) that allows investigators to initiate, retrieve, and manage on-scene risk data and complete the checklist of hazards and assign a level of risk .

Contractor shall configure the platform to integrate with SAFTI Line of Business application to pull the keys (Accident Identifier) in order to create a new RA

Contractor shall configure the platform to link the hazard and its assigned risk level with the appropriate mitigation measure and any associated personal protective equipment (PPE)

Contractor shall configure the platform to allow workflows for review and approval of the RA Assessment

Contractor shall configure the platform to provide RA information to launched staff.

Contractor shall provide the above capability via a mobile application and a web interface.

Contractor shall configure the platform to provide users with a dashboard for overall data review

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 4 of 8

Contractor shall discover, analyze, and recommend an end to end “to be” NTSBs business process for managing the on-scene hazard identification and risk mitigation for all Modal Offices.

Contractor shall Configure the platform and implement the “to be” business process for the staff to manage all on-scene hazard identification and risk mitigation for all Modal Offices.

Contractor shall configure and design the executable templates derived from risk assessments (RA) that allows investigators to initiate, retrieve, manage on-scene risk data, complete the checklist of hazards, and assign a level of risk for all Modal Offices.

Contractor shall configure the platform to link the hazard and its assigned risk level with the appropriate mitigation measure and any associated personal protective equipment (PPE) for all Modal Offices.

Contractor shall configure the platform to allow workflows for review and approval of the RA Assessment for all Modal Offices.

The contractor shall configure the platform to provide RA information to launched staff in all Modal Offices.

The contractor shall provide the above capabilities via a mobile application and a web interface for all Modal Offices.

The contractor shall configure the platform to provide users with a dashboard for overall data review of all Modal Offices.

The contractor shall provide all the discovery support, software, labor, and materials to implement its software to be fully functional and to meet the requirements of this SOW, including testing and demonstration, and provide training to up to 25 NTSB users. The contractor shall also provide software maintenance in the form of upgrades and 365-day, 24-hour critical technical support.

2.3 The above system functionality shall have an audit trail (except the instant messaging system).

The audit trail shall include tracking all people (using login and password) who accessed the system/file and the actions performed (print, view, etc.). All audit trail items shall be time stamped with time based on a hardware-based tamperproof trusted time clock provided as part of the system. System shall have variable user rights as assigned by the System Administrator (SA).

2.4 This software/solution shall include an automated system that will allow recipients to receive messages through multiple formats (such as voice messages, text messages, and email). The solution shall be able to notify the user via multiple formats and allow the recipient to send a response back to the initiator, the ROC staff. The solution should support infrastructure of multiple carriers, carrier networks and aggregators, and geo-redundant data centers, ensuring top emergency notification system performance and delivery.

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 5 of 8

The ROC and TDA staff should be able to use the software/solution to track, view, and print reports with the above information.

The contractor shall submit to the NTSB a Project Plan describing the specific incident management software solutions that will meet the requirements of the SOW.

3. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Software shall be available as true Multi-Tenant Software as a Service (SaaS). The SaaS will host the data and application in the cloud enabling users with internet connected mobile devices like iPad and iPhone to communicate and obtain real-time updates from the incident management solution. The SaaS ability is critical to the NTSB, as it allows for continued workflow and transmittal of vital real-time investigative information.

3.2 Ability to collaborate and share data with outside entities to include other emergency response agencies and/or public health departments in real-time. This feature is only possible if the solution is a true multi-Tenant SaaS in which a single instance of software and its supporting infrastructure serves multiple agencies. This ability will allow the NTSB to communicate and gather vital information from various entities and agencies during launches investigations in a more effective and efficient manner. The unique real time collaboration tool is essential to the future workflow of the NTSB’s ROC. This will allow the NTSB to effectively collaborate with mission essential entities and allow greater information sharing with increased accuracy and reduced redundancy and delays.

3.3 Ability to integrate with Identity Credentials and Access Management such as Okta, SailPoint.

3.4 Software shall have a mobile application that will work on Apple or Android OS.

3.5 Reporting Requirements:

The proposed solution shall have the capability to:

• Add emails and other documents (Word, Excel PDF) to a case file; auto injection is required as well.

• Ability to download all comments from a case in one file to comply with FOIA requests.

• Generate the following reports:

• Cases sorted by NTSB # (like dashboard view)

• Customizable reports using data fields selected by end-user.

4. DELIVERABLES

4.1 A full subscription of incident management software solution.

4.2 A complete Implementation, installation and configuration of all relevant modules of the software.

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 6 of 8

4.3 Targeted user training.

4.4 Administrator and customization training to the individuals designated as

Administrators.

4.5 A complete requirements document that shall outline the system configuration.

4.6 Provide Customer Support for software solutions.

4.7 Provide a System Security Plan, identifying a comprehensive list of all the FedRAMP

Customer Responsibility Matrix (if already FedRAMP authorized); and/or the vendor winner vendor acquires FedRAMP authorization.

5. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

5.1 All cloud services must be FedRAMP authorized and shall meet all Federal FISMA guidelines and NTSB IT policies for the protection of privacy of unclassified data. If FedRAMP is not authorized at time of award, the Contractor shall obtain FedRAMP authorization within 12 months of contract award.

5.2 Relevant policies primarily include, but are not limited to, NIST Special Publications 800-53 Rev 4, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations.

6. SECTION 508 COMPLIANCE

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires Federal agencies to make their electronic and information technology accessible to people with disabilities. This applies to all Federal agencies when they develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology.

All electronic and information Technology (EIT) procured through this contract must meet the applicable accessibility standards specified in 36 CFR1194.2, unless an agency exception to this requirement exists. Any agency exception applicable to this order is listed below.

The standards define Electronic and Information Technology, in part, as “any equipment or interconnected system or subsystem of equipment that is used in the creation, conversion, or duplication of data or information.” The standards define the type of technology covered and set forth provisions that establish a minimum level of accessibility. The application section of the standards (1194.2) outlines the scope and coverage of the standards. The standards cover the full range of electronic and information technologies in the Federal sector, including those used for communication, duplication, computing, storage, presentation, control, transport and production. This includes computers, software, networks, peripherals and other types of electronic office equipment.

This requirement is subject to the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Accessibility Requirements Statement attached and incorporated in the solicitation as Attachment A.

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 7 of 8

7. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The anticipated period of performance, subject to change based on date of award, includes one

(1) base year and four (4) one-year option periods, as follows:

Base Year: September 28, 2025 – September 27, 2026 Option Year 1: September 28, 2026 – September 27, 2027 Option Year 2: September 28, 2027 – September 27, 2028 Option Year 3: September 28, 2028 – September 27, 2029 Option Year 4: September 28, 2029 – September 27, 2030

The software solution shall be fully implemented and operational no later than 2 months after date of award.

8. LINE OF BUSINESS APPLICATION DEFINITIONS

Investigative line of business application (SAFTI):

The NTSB maintains SAFTI to store, retrieve, and manage information associated with its accident/incident investigations, safety research, and reports. NTSB investigators create a new case record for each investigation or research report in the SAFTI, and then manage that case through various investigative milestones until the release of a final report with analytical findings, probable cause, and/or safety recommendations. NTSB staff relies on data from SAFTI to monitor workflow, conduct safety research, support accident investigations, produce annual statistical reviews, respond to congressional requests, and provide Board member support. These data are also used to fulfill US reporting requirements to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Other government agencies, industry organizations, and individuals extensively use the data for safety research.

9. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

The Contracting Officer (CO) has the overall responsibility for this contract. The CO alone, without delegation, is authorized to take actions on behalf of the government to modify the agreement terms, conditions, requirements, specifications, and delivery schedules.

The Contracting Officer for this requirement is:

Peter M. Hazlinsky National Transportation Safety Board Acquisition and Lease Management Division, AD-20 490 L’Enfant Plaza East, SW Washington, DC 20594 Phone: (202) 314-6205 Email: matt.hazlinsky@ntsb.gov

The Contracting Officer will appoint a Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) for the BPA to assist in monitoring the work. The COR is responsible for the technical administration of the

Section C – Statement of Work, Page 8 of 8

BPA and technical liaison with the Contractor. The primary duties of the COR are to monitor the Contractor’s performance to ensure that all technical requirements are met by the delivery date or within the period of performance, to inspect and accept services, as well as to review and approve invoices.

The COR is NOT authorized to issue technical instructions that:

• Institute additional work outside the scope of the BPA.

• Cause an increase or decrease in the estimated cost of the BPA.

• Alter the period of performance.

• Change any of the other express terms or conditions of the BPA.

The COR for this requirement is: To be provided after award

10.0 SECURE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ATTESTATION FORM

This requirement incorporates Attachment C – Secure Software Development Attestation Form in the solicitation. In accordance with the Attachment, if any of the following conditions are met, then the Contractor shall complete the form and return it by the quotation due date:

Software requires self-attestation if any of the conditions is met:

1. The software was developed after September 14, 2022;

2. The software was developed prior to September 14, 2022, but was modified by major version changes (e.g., using a semantic versioning schema of Major.Minor.Patch, the software version number goes from 2.5 to 3.0) after September 14, 2022; or

3. The producer delivers continuous changes to the software code (as is the case for software-as-a-service products or other products using continuous delivery/continuous deployment).

11.0 NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT (NDA)

All Contractor personnel performing technical work under this BPA shall execute a NTSB Non- Disclosure Agreement (Attachment D) within fourteen (14) calendar days of BPA award.

Provisions subject to non-disclosure to protect information shall remain in effect two (2) years from termination or expiration of the BPA. Only Contractor personnel from the Contractor company that is awarded the BPA are required to sign the NDA.

Section J – List of Attachments, Page 1 of 1

SECTION J – LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

1.0 ATTACHMENT A – Information and Communications Technology (ICT)

Accessibility Requirements Statement

2.0 ATTACHMENT B – Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

3.0 ATTACHMENT C – Secure Software Development Attestation Form

4.0 ATTACHMENT D – Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA)

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 1 of 9

SECTION L – PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

The NTSB solicits your proposal for a cloud-based web-enabled incident management software that meets the specifications described in the Statement of Work (SOW). This RFP will result in the award of one (1) Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with firm fixed price or labor hour task orders. Contractors are encouraged to be innovative and resourceful in developing their approach to accomplishing the objectives stated in the SOW.

This requirement is a 100% small business set-aside. The NAICS code is 513210, Software Publishers, and the small business size standard is $47.0M.

2.0 NOTICE AND INSTRUCTIONS TO CONTRACTORS

Contractors are required to meet all the requirements of the RFP, including but not limited to instructions, conditions/notices, and requirements in the SOW. Proposals should address each factor(s) and/or sub-factor(s) as described below. Proposals that fail to address the essential requirements of this RFP or are unrealistic in terms of technical content, schedule commitment, or price will be deemed to have an inherent lack of technical competence or indicative of a failure to comprehend the requirements, or the complexity and risks associated with the requirements.

Stating that your company meets the requirements of the solicitation is not sufficient. The government may reject any proposal that is so lacking in competence or in understanding the requirements that without a major reformation of the proposal it is not adequate for evaluation purposes. Alternate/conditional proposals may result in a proposal being rejected as non-responsive.

In response to this RFP, Contractors shall submit the proposal in three (3) separate parts: Technical Merit, Past Performance, and Price:

Part I – Technical Merit: Include all information requested under “Part I - Technical Merit”.

Exclude any references to price.

Part II – Past Performance: Include all information requested under “Part II - Past Performance”.

Part III – Price: Include all information requested under “Part III – Price”.

3.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

This is a best value award. Award will be made to the Contractor whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, offers the best value to the government.

The government reserves the right to award on the basis of initial proposals received without discussions. The government may award to other than the lowest priced Contractor, or to other than the Contractor with the highest non-price rating. Proposals should be submitted on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint that the Contractor can submit to the

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 2 of 9 government.

The government will evaluate proposals for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The government may determine that a proposal is unreasonable and unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s). Below is a breakout of factors that will be evaluated:

4.0 TECHNICAL MERIT

An Executive Summary of the Contractor’s proposal is required. This summary will not be evaluated but will be used to gain an understanding of the Contractor and the overall contents of the proposal. It should identify and highlight significant features of the proposal and include the salient points contained in the various volumes and chapters. Each Contractor should include a General Information section in the Executive Summary that addresses the following:

1) company name and address, and 2) Company Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN), System for Award Management (SAM) Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number, CAGE code.

1. Factor 1 – Software Capability

Contractors shall submit a listing of product features and specifications for their proposed software solution. Contractors shall address in detail the ability of its proposed software to meet the requirements set forth in Sections 2.0 Scope of Work and 3.0 Technical Requirements of the SOW and provide any supplemental documentation necessary to fully describe the capabilities of its proposed software system. Documentation shall be comprehensive to allow the NTSB to assess the relevance and ease of use of the proposed software solution to meet the NTSB’s requirements including features beneficial to the

NTSB.

2. Factor 2 – Software Implementation Plan The Contractor shall submit its plan for implementing the software at the NTSB, including providing user training and a data migration plan. The Plan shall demonstrate the contractor’s software solution, implementation processes, understanding of SaaS hosting, and the transition in or out of the NTSB environment. It shall also include plans for (1) tracking and controlling implementation, (2) ensuring continuity of service performance;

(3) methods for monitoring, maintaining and enhancing the quality of the software, (4) ensuring timely deliverables and (5) maintaining customer satisfaction. The contractor shall describe its proposed transition plan that shall address Continuity of Services to include administrative and operational responsibilities, schedules, and plan to minimize operating disruptions.

3. Factor 3 – Key Personnel

The Contractor shall identify a Project Manager who will be considered key personnel under the resulting contract. Contractors shall demonstrate their technical capability by providing a resume for the key personnel. The resume shall detail the educational background, and relevant work experience of the proposed individual and include a list of relevant training and certifications.

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 3 of 9

4. Factor 4 – Presentation (optional at the discretion of the NTSB)

After the initial evaluation of proposals, the NTSB may invite Contractors to the NTSB for a presentation in person or virtually. During the presentation, the Contractor shall present its overall approach to fulfilling the requirements of the SOW, to include describing how the software functions. In addition, the NTSB may ask the Contractor to discuss real world scenarios and will evaluate the degree to which the Contractor’s proposed solution meets the requirements stated in its presentation. During the presentation, Contractors shall be given time to formulate and present their solution. There will be approximately four (4) NTSB technical staff present to evaluate the presentation.

It is estimated that if presentations are requested, they will last for approximately 90 minutes. In the even presentations are required, the NTSB reserves the right to invite contractors to provide presentations. Not all contractors are entitled to a presentation.

5. Factor 5 - Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Accessibility(GO/NO-GO) In order for a Contractor’s proposal to be considered for award, an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) must be provided. If an ACR is not provided, the offeror’s proposal may be eliminated from further consideration.

Provide an ACR for each commercially available ICT item offered. Create the ACR using the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template Version 2.5 or later, located at https://www.itic.org/policy/accessibility/vpat. Complete each ACR in accordance with the instructions provided in the VPAT template. Each ACR must address the applicable requirements referenced in the Work Statement regarding Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 508”). Each ACR shall state exactly how the ICT meets the applicable standards in the remarks/explanations column, or through additional narrative. All "Not Applicable" (N/A) responses must be explained in the remarks/explanations column or through additional narrative. Address each standard individually and with specificity and clarify whether conformance is achieved throughout the entire ICT Item (for example - user functionality, administrator functionality, and reporting), or only in limited areas of the ICT Item. Provide a description of the evaluation methods used to support Section 508 conformance claims. The agency reserves the right, prior to making an award decision, to perform testing on some or all of the Contractor’s proposed ICT items to validate Section 508 conformance claims made in the ACR.

Describe your approach to incorporating universal design principles to ensure ICT products or services are designed to support disabled users.

Describe plans for features that do not fully conform to the Section 508 Standards.

Describe "typical" user scenarios and tasks, including individuals with disabilities, to ensure fair and accurate accessibility testing of the ICT product or service being offered.

The total number of pages, excluding Factor 5, shall not exceed 25 pages for Part I – Technical Merit.

https://www.itic.org/policy/accessibility/vpat

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 4 of 9

5.0 PAST PERFORMANCE

Contractors shall submit completed past performance and experience questionnaires from no less than three (3) past references whose requirements are similar in scope to this NTSB requirement.

Contractors shall ask their references to complete the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment B) and submit it directly to P. Matt Hazlinsky via email at matt.hazlinsky@ntsb.gov. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to ensure that Past Performance Questionnaires are completed and timely submitted by customer references, and that correct names, addresses and phone numbers are provided in the responses for each reference. A Contractor will not be penalized in the evaluation with an unfavorable rating for lack of past performance or the failure of its past performance references to complete and submit the Past Performance Questionnaires. The government may contact Contractors’ customer references or use other references/information to verify past performance.

There is no limit on the number of pages for Part II - Past Performance.

6.0 PRICE PROPOSALS

Contractors shall complete the pricing tables included in Section B of the RFP. Contractors shall provide the firm-fixed price for the incident management software solution as specified in the SOW (Section C). For Discovery services and Implementation services, Contractors shall propose the number of hours it anticipates to fully implement its solution along with providing an hourly labor rate. For Professional services, Active Directory Integration, and SMS Messages, Contractors must propose a firm-fixed price rate. Contractors must submit pricing for the base year and all option years. If all option years are not priced, the Contractor may not be further considered. Prices will be evaluated but not scored. Price will be evaluated by adding together the base year price and all option year prices. Prices will be evaluated but not scored. Contractors shall also acknowledge all RFP amendments and complete applicable (fill-in) clauses and provisions.

There is no limit on the number of pages for Part III - Price.

7.0 EXPENSES RELATED TO CONTRACTOR’S SUBMISSIONS

This solicitation neither commits the government to pay any cost incurred in the submission of the offer nor to contract for services or supplies. Any costs incurred in anticipation of a contract shall be at the Contractor’s own risk.

8.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS AND QUESTIONS

Your proposal must be received no later than 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time (ET), on September 2, 2025.

LATE PROPOSALS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED in accordance with FAR provision 52.212- 1, Instructions to Offerors—Commercial Products and Commercial Services.

Proposals must be submitted, via e-mail, to P. Matt Hazlinsky at: matt.hazlinsky@ntsb.gov mailto:matt.hazlinsky@ntsb.gov mailto:matt.hazlinsky@ntsb.gov

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 5 of 9

The maximum file size of a Contractor email, including attachments, which the NTSB server can accept is 35 Megabytes (MB). If a Contractor’s proposal package exceeds 35MB it should be sent in separate emails. Any separate emails must be received by the time stated above.

All questions regarding this solicitation shall be directed to P. Matt Hazlinsky via email at the email address listed above. ALL QUESTIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 4:00 p.m. ET on August 18, 2025.

In accordance with FAR 4.1102, Contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database at the time an offer is submitted to comply with the annual representations and certifications requirements.

9.0 ELECTRONIC DISSEMINATION OF RFP DOCUMENTS

The CO listed above will provide access to this solicitation and amendments electronically. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to check with the CO to ensure that the Contractor has received all issued amendments.

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 6 of 9

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

The government may award one (1) IDIQ contract to the responsible Contractor(s) whose proposal conforms to the RFP, which will be most advantageous to the government, price and other non-price factors considered, such that it provides the best value to the government. Best value is defined as the procurement process that results in the most advantageous acquisition decision for the government that is performed through an integrated assessment and trade-off analysis between price and non-price factors.

The government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals if such action is in the public interest. Under a best value procurement, the NTSB may reasonably determine that the superior solution/approach merits a higher price and, therefore, represents the best value to the government or the NTSB may reasonably determine that the Contractor with other than the highest rating in non-price factors is the best value. The government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals. The government reserves the right to award without discussions.

Contractors are cautioned that they must submit a best offer with the initial proposal.

2.0 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

The following factors will be evaluated by the government:

QUOTATION

PART # FACTORS TITLE

I Technical Merit I 1 Software Capability I 2 Software Implementation Plan I 3 Key Personnel I 4 Presentation (optional at the discretion of the NTSB) I 5 ICT Accessibility II 6 Past Performance III 7 Price

1. Software Capability

The government will evaluate the extent to which the contractor’s proposal demonstrates the capability of the proposed software solution to meet the NTSB’s requirement as well as identify features beneficial to the NTSB. Higher scores may be given to contractors whose proposed software solution addresses and satisfies the requirements of the Statement of Work and will minimize the risk of unsuccessful performance.

2. Software Implementation Plan

The government will evaluate the extent to which the contractor’s proposal demonstrates a software implementation plan to meet the requirements of the Statement of Work and mitigate the risk of technical complications that could result in an unsuccessful implementation. The government will evaluate the contractor’s proposed implementation

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 7 of 9 processes, understanding of SaaS hosting, and the transition in or out of the NTSB environment, and the contractor’s plan to address (1) tracking and controlling implementation, (2) ensuring continuity of service performance; (3) methods for monitoring, maintaining and enhancing the quality of the software, (4) ensuring timely deliverables and (5) maintaining customer satisfaction, and address Continuity of Services to include administrative and operational responsibilities, schedules, and plan to minimize operating disruptions.

3. Key Personnel The government will evaluate the extent to which the contractor’s proposal demonstrate the following:

(a) A Project Manager with highly relevant technical capability.

(b) A Project Manager with highly relevant educational background, work experience, training and certifications.

4. Presentation (optional at the discretion of the NTSB) The government will evaluate information that demonstrates the following:

(a) Degree to which the Contractor’s proposed solution meets the SOW requirements and can be demonstrated to do so.

(b) Degree to which the contractor answers all questions clearly and comprehensively.

5. ICT Accessibility

ICT Accessibility will be evaluated and will be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. The government will evaluate information that demonstrates the following:

(a) An Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) for each commercially available ICT item offered through this BPA.

(b) Each ACR must address the applicable requirements referenced in the Work Statement regarding Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 508”).

(c) Each ACR shall state exactly how the ICT meets the applicable standards in the remarks/explanations column, or through additional narrative. All "Not Applicable" (N/A) responses must be explained in the remarks/explanations column or through additional narrative.

(d) Address each standard individually and with specificity and clarify whether conformance is achieved throughout the entire ICT Item, or only in limited areas of the ICT Item.

(e) A description of the evaluation methods used to support Section 508 conformance claims.

(f) An approach to incorporating universal design principles to ensure ICT products or services are designed to support disabled users.

(g) Description of plans for features that do not fully conform to the Section 508 Standards.

(h) Description of "typical" user scenarios and tasks, including individuals with disabilities, to ensure fair and accurate accessibility testing of the ICT product or service being offered.

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 8 of 9

Technical Merit is evaluated adjectively. Technical factors will be rated using the following:

TECHNICAL ADJECTIVAL RATINGS

Rating Adjectival Description

Outstanding “O”

The proposal/quote has exceptional merit and reflects an approach, which will clearly result in the superior attainment of all requirements and objectives with very low or no risk. This approach includes advantageous characteristics (strengths) and no disadvantages (weaknesses) and can be expected to result in outstanding performance. The proposal/quote provides solutions, which are feasible and practical and clearly articulated, fully supported, and demonstrates a clear understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: Very Low or none.

Note that risk involves all programmatic uncertainty in predicted performance and can extend beyond operational sources of risk and include programmatic/strategic decision-making.

Good “G”

The proposal/quote demonstrates a sound approach, which is expected to meet all requirements and objectives. This sound approach may include some characteristics of substance (strengths), and if there are disadvantages (weaknesses), they can be corrected, which results in proposal/quote that can be expected to result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is low as the proposal/quote contains solutions, which are considered feasible and practical. These solutions are clear and precise, supported, and demonstrate an understanding of the requirements. Risk Level:

Low

Acceptable “A”

The proposal/quote demonstrates an approach, which is capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach includes both strengths and weaknesses, but the strengths are not outweighed by the weaknesses.

Collectively, the strengths and weaknesses are likely to result in acceptable performance. However, the risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate, unless weaknesses are corrected, and Contractor performance may require constant oversight by the government. These solutions demonstrate a general understanding of the requirements but may lack explanation and continuity.

The proposal/quote does not contain any weaknesses that are fatal to the overall acceptability of the proposal/quote. Risk Level: Moderate

Unacceptable “U”

The proposal/quote demonstrates an approach, which will very likely not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. This proposal/quote has weaknesses of substance, and strengths, which if they exist, are outweighed by weaknesses, some of which may be fatal to the proposal/quote because they cannot be corrected. The risk of unsuccessful performance is high as the proposal/quote contains solutions which are not feasible and/or practical. The solutions may lack any clarity or precision, lack detail or are unsupported, and otherwise do not demonstrate an understanding of the requirement. (Note that if the proposal/quote that is so deficient that it (1) fails to address the essential requirements of the RFP; (2) is unrealistic in terms of technical content, schedule commitment, or cost/price; (3) has such an inherent lack of technical competence or is indicative of a failure to comprehend the requirements, the complexity and risks associated with the requirements, it may be rejected by

Section L – Proposal Instructions and Section M – Eval Factors for Award, Page 9 of 9 the Contracting Officer as non-responsive provided that, without a major reformation of the proposal/quote, it is not adequate for evaluation purposes.

Alternate/conditional proposals/quotes may also result in a proposal/quote being rejected as non-responsive.) Risk Level: High

Within Technical Merit, the following technical factors are listed in descending order of importance: Software Capability, Software Implementation Plan, Key Personnel, Presentation, and ICT Accessibility Factors. While Past Performance is of lesser importance than the Technical Merit factors, all the non-price evaluation factors when combined are significantly more important than Price. However, as proposals become more equal in non-price factors, Price becomes more important.

Past Performance will be evaluated and will be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. The government will assess the relevance, breadth and quality of the Contractor’s recent past performance with clients who have purchased similar services and evaluate the quality of the Contractor’s past performance based on the past performance references submitted on behalf of the Contractor and/or other information obtained from references provided by the Contractor, as well as other relevant past performance information obtained from other sources known to the government. A Contractor without a record of past performance or for whom information on relevant past performance is not available will be evaluated as neutral. Contractors are cautioned that despite the relative weight of the non-price factors, proposals that receive an unacceptable in Part II may be deemed ineligible for award.

Part III, Price is not rated adjectively. Price will be evaluated but not scored. Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the government’s best interests, the government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. This includes options under FAR clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, which applies to the solicitation. Evaluation of options under FAR 52.217-8 will be accomplished by using the prices offered for the last option period to determine the price for a 6-month option period, which will be added to the base and other option years to arrive at the total price. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the options(s). The price evaluation will include evaluation of all proposed labor categories and proposed labor hours.

Pricing will be evaluated to determine whether the proposed pricing is realistic for the products/services being purchased; reflects a clear understanding of the requirements and is consistent with the approach described in the Contractor’s technical proposal. As part of its price evaluation, the government specifically reserves the right to evaluate the risk associated with any pricing schemes.

Prices will be evaluated to determine the reasonableness of a Contractor’s proposal. Evaluation may include analysis to determine a Contractor’s comprehension of the solicitation requirements, as well as the validity of a Contractor’s approach. A price that is found to be unreasonably high or unrealistically low in relation to the proposed solution may result in the proposal receiving a lower evaluation or a Contractor’s proposal may be rejected if the pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the government.